Encouraging or forcing research?
This is a tricky one. I agree that there are other bodies than the
professional association which promote, fund and manage research
within our profession and should be left so to do. I also agree that
research cannot and should not be carried out by everyone as so many
lack the skills to do it well or even acceptably.
However, I also share Biddy's desire to see LIS as an evidence-based
practice where service development is based on research evidence and
new services are properly introduced and evaluated. In an evidence-based
climate
a professional association should be doing more than 'encouraging'
research,
as if it were a luxury or a rather frivolous activity.
I would like to see the LIRG response make a case for the new body to
incorporate
something of the evidence-based culture via an emphasis on research as an
integral part of professional practice. I think therefore that the wording
should be
stronger than 'encourage' and should incorporate some of Biddy's remarks
about
research as key to organisational development.
Have I added anything here or have I reiterated everyone else's views with
no clear
conclusion? It's late Friday and my brain's packing up.
As for the membership and name details I broadly agree with John - and I'm
very glad I
know so little about SIGs and OILs too!
Maybe the thing is to redraft the LIRG response in the light of comments
made on this list
and resend it to us all, Ros?
Clare
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|